The Barrington Planning Board is recommending the former Carmelite monastery property be subdivided into more than a half-dozen single family house lots, a “pocket neighborhood” development with 10 to 12 housing units, and that a little less than two acres be left as open space. 

It also calls for the monastery building to be demolished. 

At its meeting on April 26, the Planning Board reviewed three development options drafted by Union Studios. The options were based, in part, on a rough design previously offered by Planning Board member Bill Kurtz. 

After the Planning Board discussed the options and members of the public weighed in with their own thoughts on the matter, Planning Board member Brian Rua made a motion to recommend Option 2, which showed 10 single family house lots, a pocket neighborhood built on a 68,000 square foot lot, and the demolition of the existing monastery.

Rua included a few revisions to Option 2 — he said the three single family house lots to the south of property should remain open space (dropping the total number of single family lots to seven); the pocket neighborhood should be individually owned via a condo association or homeowners association; that a planned through-road connecting Freemont Avenue to Watson Avenue be changed into a pedestrian/bike path; that the pocket neighborhood development have a maximum of 10 or 12 units; that there be two separate RFPs (requests for proposals) — one for the individual lots and one for the pocket neighborhood; that the town maintain control through deed restrictions or phased development; and that one of the single family house lots and 25 percent of the pocket neighborhood be dedicated to low- to moderate-income housing.

According to a draft copy of the meeting minutes, Rua’s initial motion failed to get a second, as the discussion about the property continued. 

A short time later, Rua made a very similar motion adding one more condition: that the lot lines on the south side of the property be revised. 

With that change, fellow Planning Board member Greg Lucini offered a second to the motion, and all six members present (Kurtz, Rua, Lucini, Roni Phipps, Larry Bacher and Rick Simms) voted to approve. 

Brian Morley and Alexander Mueller were not present. 

The recommendation will be shared with members of the Barrington Town Council for their May 1 meeting. 

According to the Council agenda, the monastery property development plan has been listed as a “discuss and act” item. 

Barrington Town Manager Phil Hervey, in a memo to the Council, offered some of the possible actions the Town Council could take.

“A motion could include placing the question of allowing demolition before voters again at the May FTM, or the special FTM to be held in November, with the condition that the development of the site would be consistent with the conceptual plan endorsed by the Planning Board (and to include any additional revisions supported by the Council),” Hervey wrote. 

The development of the property has followed a long path up to this point — the town purchased the property after a very close vote (176 to 175) at the 2021 Financial Town Meeting, but included a stipulation that the monastery building be preserved. 

An ad hoc committee was formed, met numerous times to discuss the future of the property, and recommended consensus items including renewable energy and availability of public open space. 

At the 2022 FTM, town officials asked residents to vote a second time on whether to allow for the demolition of the monastery building. Residents again voted to preserve the structure. 

In February, the Council tasked the Planning Board to review two options that had been drafted by a previous consultant (4Ward Planning) and provide a recommendation. That charge led to the Union Studio sketches, and eventually a re-working of Bill Kurtz’s design proposal. 

Public comments

According to the draft minutes from the April 26 Planning Board meeting, nearly 20 residents shared their thoughts about the development options and the property itself. 

Some residents, including Kate Burgess, Amy Nunn and Ann Strong, said the seven-acre property should be maintained as preservation land. Laura Turner supported Options 2 or 3 because they included some affordable housing. And some people spoke about a mix of open space with a housing option.

Also discussed during the public comment period was possibly converting the existing monastery building into veterans housing, which was earlier referenced by Planning Board Chair Roni Phipps. 

Ann Strong also said she had tried to file a motion for the Financial Town Meeting to preserve the land as open space, but had been advised by the town solicitor’s office that such a motion was out of order.